HomeMy WebLinkAbout1532 Cypress Avenue - Staff Report (2)Item #
Action alendar
City of Burlingame
Design Review and Special Permit for Declining Height Envelope
for a Second Story Addition
Address: 1532 Cypress Avenue Meeting Date: 1/14/02
Request: Design review and special permit for declining height envelope for a second story addition at 1555
Cypress Avenue, zoned R-1 (C.S. 25.28.040 and C.S. 25.51.010)
Property Owner: Anne Harrington
Applicant/Designer: Swanberg Associates, Krisjon Swanberg, Principal APN: 028-294120
General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Lot Area: 5,000 SF
Date Submitted: July 16, 2001 Zoning: R-1
CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15303 - Class 3- construction and location of limited
numbers of new, small facilities or structures including (a) single-family residences not in conjunction with the
building of two or more such units. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed or
converted under this exemption.
Summary: The applicant is requcsting dcsign review and a special permit for declining height envelope for a second
story addition at 1532 Cypress Avenue, zoned R-1. The existing two bedroom, one-story house contains 1,839 SF
of floor area (.36 FAR), including an detached single car garage and an arbor on the left side of the house. The
applicant is proposing to remodel the first floor and add a 920 SF second story addition. The addition would include
two bedrooms each having a full bathroom and a walk-in closet. There are two decks proposed off of the second
floor that would be covered by wood trellises, and are therefore counted toward the overall floor area. The overall
would increase to 2,705 SF (.54 FAR) where 2,989 SF (.59 FAR) is the maximum allowed. One covered off-street
parking space is provided in the detached garage and meets the Code requirement for a three-bedroom house. The
applicant is seeking a special permit for declining height envelope along the right side where 123 SF extends beyond
the declining height envelope. All other zoning code requirements have been met.
CURRENT PREVIOUS EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D
PROPOSAL PROPOSAL
12/17/O1 7/16/O1
SETBACKS
Front: lst flr No change No change 20'-0" 15'-0" or block average
2nd flr N�``�" N/A 20'-0"
Side (left): l s` fl'r No change No change 11'-9" 4'-0"
2„� fl,r See DHE N/A
Side(right):IS' flr No change No change 2�_�»* 4'-0"
2"� flr N/A
Rear: lst flr No change No change 36'-0" 15'-0"
2nd flr 36'-0" N/A 20'-0"
Design Review ar�d ,5pecial Peririit 1532 C:� press Ave�iue
CURRENT PREVIOUS EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D
PROPOSAL PROPOSAL
12/17/O1 7/16/O1
LOT 39.9% (1,999 SF) 39.5% (1,979 SF) 37.6% (1,884 SF) 40% (2,000 SF)
COVERAGE:
FAR: 2,��1 SF/ 2,751 SF/ 1,839 SF/ 2,989 SF/
0.55 FAR 0.55 FAR 0.36 FAR 0.59 FAR
PARKING: No change No change 1 covered 1 covered
�lo�-o°� x Zo°-o�°� (Zo�-o°� X Zo�-o�°�
+ 1 uncovered + 1 uncovered
HEIGHT: 2��-3�� 2g�-6�� lg�_�,� 2'/z stories 30'
whichever is less
DH Special Permit Special Permit N/A See code
ENVELOPE: Required' Required'
* Existing non-confornzing �
' Special Permit for Declining Height Envelope - 123 SF ((3'-8" x 7'-7") +(T-3" x 13'-1") = 122.65) along the
right side extends beyond the declining height envelope.
Staff Comments: See attached. Planning staff would like to note that the previously reported lot coverage and
FAR numbers were incorrectly calculated and the numbers shown above have been adjusted to indicate the
correct calculations.
August 13, 2001 Design Review Study Meeting: On August 13, 2001, the Planning Commission reviewed this
project for design review (see attached 8/13/O1 Planning Commission minutes). The Planning Commission
requested the following changes and referred the project to a design review consultant. The concerns expressed
by lhe Planning Commission included the following:
• Windows at the front elevation are not well-coordinated; they axe miniscule and not pedestrian friendly;
• The north elevation is lacking windows, which might be added to help reduce the massing;
• Would like to see consistency with the windows on the fist and second stories;
• Applicant should provide clarification for the proposed awnings; what are the materials, colors and
dimensions to be used. Proposed awnings might not be the best option to add detail to this style of house;
could consider wooden trellis; and
• There is a certain simplicity in the design that is valuable, it needs detail, but does not need to be "dolled-
up„
After working with the design review consultant the architect submitted revised plans (date stamped December
17, 2001). The following changes were made to the plans
Front Elevation
Canvas awning over front porch changed to wooden trellis
Wood railing added at front steps
Tile added to both first and second floor parapets
Window added on left side of second floor
Overall height lowered by 1'-3"
�
Desi,�n Review and Special Pcrmit
Rear Elevation
Canvas awning over second story deck changed to a wood trellis
Second story cantilevered deck revised with wood posts and detailing added underneath
Wood brackets added underneath Juliet balcony
Style of the window on the lower floor right side has been revised
South Elevation
Style of two lower floor windows has been revised
Wood brackets and tile have been added to boxed bay on the second floor
1531 Cypress Ave�iue
North Elevation
Two story vertical wall has been articulated with a 1'-6" projection of the second floor over the first floor, with
wood brackets under the projection.
A window has been added to the second floor, and the originally proposed window has been enlarged.
A window has been added to the first floor.
Please refer to the design review consultant's memo, dated January 4, 2002, for comments regarding these
revisions.
Design Reviewer's Comments and Conclusion: The design reviewer's January 4, 2002 memo is attached. The
design reviewer notes that the proposed awnings have been revised to wooden trellises, which is an existing element
of the design. The trellis feature also provides an opportunity for climbing plants. Along with this, other details
of the existing design have been added to the addition including terra cotta vents, wood windows and wooden
corbels. Windc�ws have been added on the first and second floor to balance the elevations, and the existing windows
on the first floor will be changed to wood with mullions (except the front elevation and 2 at the north elevation).
The design reviewer notes that while the second floor has added windows for balance it also maintains a level of
privacy for each of the neighbors. The design reviewer feels that the revised plans reflect an improved design and
have addressed all of the concerns noted by the Planning Commission at the August 13, 2001 study meeting
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the
Council on Apri120, 1998 are outlined as follows:
Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood;
2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood;
Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure;
4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and
Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components.
Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit for garage length the Planning Commission must
find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.51.020 a-d):
(a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are
Design hzview and Specinl Perntil 1532 C}press Avenue
consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood;
(b) the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or
addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood;
(c) the proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city; and
(d) removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is
consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal that is proposed is
appropriate.
Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should
be by resolution and include findings. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated. At the public hearing
the following conditions should be considered:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped
December 17, 2001, sheets A.1 through A.6, site plan, floor plans and building elevations;
2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the second floor, which would include adding or enlarging a
dormer(s) or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review;
3. that the conditions of City Engineer, Chief Building Official and Recycling Specialist's July 16, 2001
memos shall be met; and
4. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as
amended by the City of Burlingame.
Catherine Keylon
Planner
c: Swanberg Associates, Krisjon Swanberg, applicant & designer
Jan 04 02 03:25p Milmeyer hilmeyer Rssoc (6501347-0650 p.2
Design Review Comments
City of Buriingame
Prn�trty Owntr:
Applicawl Nmrrr.
D�esianer:
Projtct Addr�ss:
PlaRner:
D� ojleevi�w:
Drsign Gaiddiw�s
Anne Harria�tou
Krisjoo Swaaberg
Krisjon Swanberg
1532 Cypress Ave�ae
Catherine Keybo
4 Jaauary 2002
1. COMPATIBILITY OF THE ARCHITEC�rURaL STYI.E wITH THAT OF
THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THF, KEIGHBORHOOD.
The existing residence is located in a quaint neighborhood with a bt of thought to
design in thcir residencrs. T'here are a variety of styles and materials used in the
neighborhood. Adjacent is a beautifully remudeled 2 story shingled home, across
the street there are wood siding homes and stucco struciures throughout the street.
T�his existing home is a flat roofed stucco home with a parapet. Tl�,ere is an
attractive trellis �ver the ciriveway, front picture windows and double hung
windows on the side elevations. 'I'he front porch was converted to an interior
space circa 1970 with yellow opaque glass. The street has a couple of badly
remodeled homes, twt as a rule, the neighborhood has not lost its charm.
RESPECT FOR THE PARKING AND GARAGE PATTERNS IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
In keeping with the character of the existing house and neighborhood, the garage
will remain detached at the rear of the yard.
3. ARCHITECTURAL STYLF, AND CONSISTENCY AND MASS AND
BULK OF' STRUCTURES, INCLL'DING aCCESSORY STRUCTURES.
The designer has talcen a small bungalow with a parapet, and added a second floor
set back sc� a, tu reduce the impact &om the street. He has incorporated the
existing detail of the parapet, the terra cotta v�nts, the wood windows, and the
wooden trellis into the proposed acidition. Th� side elevations of the second floor
have areas ca�ilevering over the tirst floor, supported by wooden corbels.
4. INTERFACE OF THE PROPOSED STRt�CTURE WITA THE
STRUCTURFS ON AU.IACENT PROPERTIES.
Jan 04 02 03:26p Milme�er Hilmeyer Assoc (6501347-0650 p.3
Harrington Residence
1532 Cypress Avewe
Page 2 of 3
Ti�e resiaences to eithrr side of this proposed addition have a driveway bet�y�
ihe houses> leaving a separation at least 10 feet between residences. Each of the
neighbor's residences is two stories. The designer has added i��� � the
elevatbns by placing each elevation in different planes. The propo� �o�
floor has a minimum of windows, retaining privacy for each of the neighbors.
5• LANDSCAPING AND !TS PROPORTION TO MASS AND BULK OF
STRUCTURAI, COMPONENTS.
There are existing hedges on each side of the residence acting as separ�fion from
the �ighboring houses. Tl�ere is a single ma�nolia as a street tree. T�ere is an
existing wooden trellis at the left side of the house which will probably be filled
wrth flowets in the spring and summer months. Alsn, there are proposed trellis' at
the second tloor balconies which will have the capability to drape plants, thus
softening t�e addition.
6• IN THE CASE OF AN ADDITION, COMYATABILTY WITH THE
ARCHITECTURAL STYLE AND CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING
STRUCTURE AS REMODELED.
As previously noted, the propc�sc-ci addition incorpora�es many elemetrts �om the
existing residence, as we(1 as adding new details typical of this type home_
CONCERNS FROM PLANNING COMMISSIOr:
T6e wiodow�s at t�e froot elevatioo are not well-coordin�ted; they s�re �f�ise�k ��d
■ot ped�.striao {ri��dh,, The number and size of windows has been increased to ba]ance
the ebevations, especially the fiont elevation.
T�e �orti ekvatio� u lacking windows, wbich might be uddtd to 6elp nd�tt
misa�ng. Not only have windows been added. hut the second floor addition is
cantilevered over ihe first floor, placed on wooden corbels. This breaks the elevation into
P��, �ing interest. Also, the second floor balcon� is set back firom the second floor
wall plane. '
Wou�d lilce to see coasi�tency with the wiodows on the first aod second stories. The
windows on the first floor wi1] be �hanged to wood with mullions (except at the frort
elevation, and 2 at the north elrva�iun). I`he propc�seci ,econd t]oor windaws wil! be
wood wtth mul(ions. Alsc�, both iloors will have wooded &ench doe�rs with mullions.
Applieaot s6a11 provide clarificatioo fc�r the proposed awnings; what nateriab,
colora i�d diwe�siona to be used. Proposed awnin�s mig6t not be the best optioo to
add detail to t�is style house; could consider a wooden trellis. A concern with
awnings is that they are an `'acid-c,n" to a structure, and not a pennanent fi�cture. The
homeowner and her designer chose to incorporate the rxisting trellis concept throughout
the pruposed design These have been added to the &ont porch, and the Gont and rear
balconies.
Jan 04 02 03:26p nilmeyer hilme�er Rssoc (6501347-0650 p.4
Harrington Residence
1532 Cypress Avenue
Page 3 of 3
Taere is a cerw�e s��P����h, io the design that is valuable, it need� det��1, b■t does
eot oeed to be "dolled up". "I'he designer has worked with the simplicity of the existing
�18n- ��rporatit� the original elements, i.e. the �ooden trellis, wood wind��,vs at�
trim, flat roof; but has also added to the.� elements the wooden corbels at the second
floor which he�p b� up the elevations' planes.
COMMENTS:
I� ��eowner and designer were very receptive to the concerns of the PC, arxi worked
��Y ��perazively through the design review process. I feel the designer has improved
the design while incorporating the concerns Grom the pla��g Co�ssion.
�',�,�-�j
Catherine . . Ni yer A
4 '/. hours
RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW,
AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE
RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for design
review and special permit for declining height envelope for a second floor addition at 1532 Cypress Avenue,
zoned R-1, Anne F. Hamngton, property owners, APN: 028-294-120;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
January 14, 2002, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and
testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that:
1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments
received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the
project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per
CEQA Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15303 - Class 1-(e) additions to existing structures
provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before
the addition, is hereby approved.
2. Said design review and special permit for declining height envelope is approved, subject to
the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such design review and special permit
are as set forth in the minutes and recording of said meeting.
3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records
of the County of San Mateo.
CHAIRMAN
I, Joseph Bojues , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission
held on the 14th day of January, 2002 , by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
SECRETARY
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and special permit.
1532 Cypress Avenue effective January 23, 2002
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department
date stamped December 17, 2001, sheets A.1 through A.6, site plan, floor plans and building
elevations;
2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the second floor, which would include adding or
enlarging a dormer(s) or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review;
3. that the conditions of City Engineer, Chief Building Official and Recycling Specialist's July
16, 2001 memos shall be met; and
4. that the project shall meet aE� the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes,
1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame.
�
��(` GITY o\ CITY OF BURLWGAME
BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
o•�- BURLINGAME, CA 94010
TEL: (650) 558-7250
1532 CYPRESS AVENUE
Application for design review and special
permit for declining height envelope for a pUBLIC HEARING
second story addition at 1532 Cypress
Avenue, zoned R-1. (APN: 028-294-120) NOTICE
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission
announces the following public hearing on
Monday, January 14, 2002 at 7:00 P.M. in
the City Hall Council Chambers located at
501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California.
Mailed January 4, ''^`12
(Please rEfcr to other sideJ
CITY OF BUKI.INGAME
A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior
tu the meeting at the Plannin�� Departtnent �il 501 Primrose Road,
BurlinQame, California.
If you challet�ge the �subject application(s) i1i court, you may be� limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at t,he public hearing,
described in the notice or in written correspundence�clelivered to the city
at or prior to the pt�blic nearing. �
Property owners who receive this notice are re�sponsible for informing their
tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call (650)
55�-7250. 'Chank you. �
,�� : , : , ;�
Mar17aret Monroe ' �:•" � �`��� ����(}�/,,,�
Cit Planner � �� _ '�'
y �
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
(Please f-efer to other sic�le)
I